View - DAIICT Intranet

DA-IICT
Epics & Episteme
Assignment on Mahabharata
Puneet jindal
200501239

Narration and Writing
Vyasa, the celebrated compiler of the Vedas, was the son of the great sage Parasara.
It was he who gave to the world the divine epic of the Mahabharata. Having
conceived the Mahabharata he thought of the means of giving the sacred story to the
world.
It was before the days of printing, when the memory of the learned was the sole
repository of books. Vyasa first taught the great epic to his son, the sage Suka. Later,
he expounded it to many other disciples. Were it not so, the book might have been
lost to future generations.
Janamejaya, the son of the great King Parikshit, conducted a great sacrifice in the
course of which Vaisampayana narrated the story at the request of the former.
Afterwards, this story, as told by Vaisampayana, was recited by Suta in the forest of
Naimisa to an assembly of sages under the lead of the Rishi Saunaka.
Suta addressed the ascetics "I had the good fortune to hear the story of the
Mahabharata composed by Vyasa to teach humanity dharma and the other ends of
life. I should like to narrate it to you."
Suta continued "I heard the main story of the Mahabharata and the episodic tales
contained therein told by Vaisampayana at the sacrifice conducted by King
Janamejaya. Afterwards, I made an extensive pilgrimage to various sacred places and
also visited the battlefield where the great battle described in the epic was fought. I
have now come here to meet you all." He then proceeded to tell the whole story of
the Mahabharata in the grand assembly.
Narrative Structure
The mahabharata's narrative technique matches its complexity and depth of
philosophy. The technique of narration is that of a story within a story. The main
account of the kuru dynasty begins after several small stories. The narration happens
at many levels. Vaismpayana narrates the tale to janmajeya at the snake ceremony.
Another sage who heard the story at the ceremony narrates it to the bhrigu
2

ahmans whom he meets in the naimisha forest. Finally,there is Vyasa, the
overarching narrator, who is telling the tale to lord ganesha, the penman of the
mahabharata. Such an intricate and elaborate narrative structure prepares the
readers for further framings. The narrative structure of the text is so complex
because of the “dialogic relationship among voices” in the Mahabharata. For
instance, the sage brihadasva narrated the story of nala and damyanti to Yudhishtra
in the forest to console him for his loss in the dicing match. It also serves the purpose
of comparing the results of dicing for yuddhishthira and nala. Such narratives are
spread all over the text and they all add to its encyclopaedic quality.
In the current text of the Mahabharata one recognizes two different levels of
narration as regards the main story of the epic. One is the discourse of the
Ugrasravas, which makes up the outermost, larger framework of narration, while this
framework encapsulates the inner one represented by the recital Vyasa original epic
by one of his own pupils named Vaismpayana.
Now we analyze the narrative structure of Mahabharata and get an insight of its
characters from three stories taken from it.
Story-1
It is towards the starting of the Adi parva that Vaismpayana launches his long
recitation. The first chapter of this sub parva opens with a scene of Vyasa paying a
visit to the king Janamejaya, who has already had himself consecrated for the
performance of snake sacrifice. In the presence of priests and kings assembled in the
sacrificial site, Janamejaya first pays due homeage to Vyasa and then express his
earnest wish to learn all the deeds of Kurus and Pandavas, especially about the fierce
battle fought by them. Vyasa himself does not take on the task of relating the grand
story but entrusts to his pupil Vaismpayana who is sitting nearby, ordaining him to
recite the whole epic. Vaismpayana instantly starts his recital of the whole epic which
is known as “itihasnam puratanam”. It is this very recital which holds the whole main
part of the Mahabharata. As for the absence of the Vyasa own narration in the epic,
the reason could be sage direct participation in the main story. During the long recital
by Vaismpayana, king Janamejaya occasionally interpolates some comments or
3

questions. The whole main corpus of the epic was therefore, be regarded as a
dialogue between the king and the disciple of Vyasa.
The first book contains two different introductions to Ugrasravas, each located at a
different place. The narrative of Ugrasravas visit to ascetics in the Naimisa forests,
with which the entire epic starts, is repeated at the beginning of the fourth
subsection, Paulomaparva. Now, this passage is followed by verses in which seers
asked the suta to tell his stories only in presence of their venerable chieftain Saunaka.
On the arrival of latter the suta entered in a long talk with him.
The Astikaparva starts with the Saunaka’s question as to why king Janamejaya
resolved to annihilate all the serpents on earth and how Astika rescued them from
danger of death in sacrificial burning. In response to these question, suta relates the
sequence of events culminating in Janamejaya’s celebration of the snake sacrifice for
the purpose of avenging the death of his father, as well as deeds of Astika, son born
to a brahmin ascetic and a serpent princess, who finally succeeds in stopping the
sacrifice by asking a boon from the king. Suta concludes it with statement that one
who has recited or listened to Akhyana of Astika from its beginning shall nowhere
encounter any danger from snakes.
The text of Astika parva continues for further 10 verses. This text consists of dialogue
between Saunaka and Ugrasrava. In this passage Saunaka first expresses his
satisfaction having learnt the marvelous deeds of Astika and then wishes to hear
Mahabharata from Ugrasrava. To this request Ugrasrava described Saunaka the
circumstances in which Vyasa ordered his disciple Vaismpayana to recite the ancient
Itihasa before king Janamejaya. And narration of Vaismpayana continued till the end
of Mahabharata.
Story-2
The old king Dhritrashtra in the fifteenth year after the great battle retires from royal
life into a forest, accompanied by his own wife, his brother’s wife, the widows of
kaurava princes and passed their last years in fasting and penance till they meet their
4

death. One of the significant events which occur in these years is the reunion of the
old ascetic with his old dead sons, realized through the supernatural power of Vyasa.
This incident is narrated in subsection Putradarshanam parva. Dhritrashtra, Gandhari
and the widows of kaurava princes had never been free from the grief since the
death of their sons and husbands. When Vyasa meets them in the forest they bewail
their bitter fate and appeal to him for support and sympathy. At his instruction they
all approached to the banks of Ganga, and there by his yogic power, he invokes the
spirit of dead princes. Meeting again with each other, both the living and the dead
pass the night in utmost felicity. After the disappearance of the princes at the
daybreak, their widows plunge into the river in order to be reunited with their
husbands forever.
The passage describing the felicitous life in the heavenly abodes with which the
widows are rewarded for their voluntary suicide is immediately followed by verses
which specify the merits one acquires by reciting or listening the story of family
reunion.
“Suta uvach” is devoted to a lengthy philosophical discourse Vaismpayana holds in
response to a question by Janamejaya about the reappearance of dead bodies. In a
subsequent chapter, Suta relates how the king deeply moved by the family reunion,
entreats Vyasa to show him his own father again. The sage realizes the wish of the
king instantly by invoking the spirit of Pariksit.
The shift in narration from Vaismpayana to Ugrasrava is necessitated by the nature of
the content since the incident which occurs simultaneously with Vaismpayana’s
recital at the sacrificial site cannot be narrated by the reciter himself as a past event
and therefore it is being narrated by Ugrasrava.
Story-3
When Yudhishthir had Maya danav build his assembly, he conducted the Rajsooya
Yagya and for the benefit of humankind, gathered scholars and distributed the riches
collected from various kings amongst scholars, Brahmans, intellectuals and the
5

needy. As a reaction to this, the assembly hall that Duryodhan constructed, was
something like a modern casino, where gambling was the only form of
entertainment. There could have been no spiritual discussions, no worship or praying,
and no exchange of higher thoughts and beliefs here. The only sport that could take
place was gambling. Before coming to Hastinapur, there has been an extensive
discussion between Vidur and Yudhishthir in Indraprastha, where Yudhishthir has
opposed gambling in the strongest terms. After reaching Hastinapur, an entire
chapter is dedicated to Yudhishthir’s argument with Shakuni, where Shakuni defends
gambling and Yudhisthira opposes it.
Yudhishtra says “Gambling causes quarrels and brawls. No intelligent person would
like to gamble. Gambling is a form of deception and a cause for sin. One can neither
demonstrate valiance suitable to a Kshatriya, nor are there any set rules for it. I have
no desire to gamble.”
One particular utterance of Yudhishthir is quoted over and over in many discussions.
Where he says, it is wrong to gamble, it causes complete destruction, but if he were
invited, he would not refuse. Yudhishthir was the kind of person who is willing to
endure the biggest tests in order to prove his smallest obligation to dharma. Thus
Yudhishthir sits down to gamble in accordance with respect for Dhritarashtra’s
invitation despite being fully opposed to it in his heart.
In Mahabharata, the word ‘uncle’ has been used nowhere for Dhritarashtra in
Pandava’s context. He has been called pita in the original verses. Yudhishthir’s
dharma was in his truth, and in fulfilling the wishes of elders. Therefore, knowing that
Dhritrashtra could rob him of his life, or knowing that Dhritarashtra wants Duryodhan
to be the ruler of Hastinapur, even if that requires killing the Pandavas, Yudhishthir
does not disobey any of Dhritarashtra’s commands. Yudhishthir seems bound by this
commitment to his dharma during the betting that took place in the gaming hall. He
is constantly opposing gambling, but never refuses to play. As that was
Dhritarashtra’s command.
After Vidur warns Yudhishtra in Indraprastha, he says in clear words, “On command
of King Dhritarashtra, I certainly wish to partake in the games. A father is always dear
to a son.” After arriving in front of Dhritarashtra, he again says, “Sire! You are our
6

lord. Command us what we should do. Bhaarat! We always wish to remain under your
direction.” He is willing to handover the entire kingdom to Dhritarashtra even after
winning the war of Mahabharata, because father is the lord, and a son is under his
command.
Yudhishthir regains his wealth and rule as a boon from Dhritarashtra after having lost
everything once, and Draupadi has been fully humiliated. But Yudhishthir is called
back again, and again he sits down to gamble. The reason for him to gamble a second
time is the same as what it originally was – his father’s and king’s command.
“Jewel amongst Bharat’s descendents and son of Pandu Yudhishthir! Your father King
Dhritarashtra has instructed you to return. Our assembly is once again complete with
its members and is waiting for you. You shall throw the dice and gamble.”
Yudhishthir Said, “All creatures attain auspicious and inauspicious results by the
inspiration of God. No one can evade them. It appears I will have to gamble again.
This invitation to gamble by the command of Old King Dhritarashtra is the cause of
our family’s destruction. Even as I know this, I cannot disobey his order.”
By gambling, he obeyed his father’s command. Why was it then necessary to play till
the end and get up only after total destruction? He could have gotten up at any time.
The answer to this question could be found out by seeing Vidura’s action at that time.
He was the biggest benefactor of the Pandavas. He opposes gambling vigorously. He
appeals to Dhritarashtra repeatedly to stop the game, but not once does he say to
Yudhishthir, “that is enough. Son! Leave the game and get up.” The game has been
started by the king’s command, and only by his command can it be paused or ended.
Without his permission Yudhishthir cannot leave the game, and as he plays, he must
wager something. Knowingly, he loses everything and stops. He has already lost his
brothers and his own self. As he loses himself, Shakuni says to Yudhishthir, “Sire! To
wager yourself and to lose is an act of extreme impiety (adharma). It’s a great sin to
wager yourself while you still possess wealth. Sire! Your dearest Draupadi is such a
hand that you have not yet lost. Thus wager Krishnā and by her, win yourself back.” It
is worth noting that dharma raj Yudhishthir is following his dharma even while
gambling, while vulpine and deceiving Shakuni is accusing him of being improper. As
a response to this Yudhishthir immediately wagered Draupadi and by losing, while
7

protecting his dharma he earned that disgrace that the society has still not been able
to forgive. Every act of dharma raj Yudhishthir is for the protection of dharma.
Dhritarashtra is the only person who could have stopped the game. But he simply
doesn't have the spine to make his own decisions, or stick to them when he does
make them. He puts all of that off onto his son. Rather than guiding his son by being
a moral example, he subtly encourages his son by lack of response to terrible
actions. Dhritarashtra is one of those characters who is so incabable of morality (good
or bad) that he'll put himself as far away from it as possible, by rationalizing or
avoding poor decisions,
The problem was that Vidura was powerless. He can merely advise, exhort, and plead
with the blind Dhritarashtra who, obsessed by his desire that the throne must be his
son Duryodhana’s, is deaf to all appeals. In the very beginning of the epic we are told
that the Kauravas are a giant tree of passion whose root is the weak-minded
Dhritarashtra. Its seed is infatuation; its branches are anger and pride rooted in
ignorance. Or even pretending he doesn't understand it at all.
Bhishma’s failure as a leader of the polity lies in his never having practiced the rajadharma
he speaks of at length to Yudhishthira on his bed-of-arrows which seems to
become his penance for inaction. In a Kshatriya the “witness” stance only brings
about the destruction of the policy. The Kshatriya must use power to protect the
rights of the weak, for that is his dharma, the truth of his nature. To abjure this
because of a self-imposed vow and turn into the “egotistical sublime” of the age
brings destruction and misery in its wake not only for oneself, but also for the entire
society of which such a person is the corner stone, the pillar of strength.
Karna might appear to be nobility and generosity personified, but actually he is eating
his heart out in envy and every act of his is triggered by a sense of deeply injured
merit, a hyper-sensitivity about his low caste, which goes so far as to drive him to bid
a princess to be stripped in public and to term her a prostitute.
The question would be asked "Why did Bhishma, Dronacharya, and Vidura not desert
the evil company of king Dhritarashtra and join the Pandavas?" The answer is given
by Bhishma himself. He had vowed to remain loyal to the throne of Hastinapur
8

irrespective of who occupied it. This pledge was more than anything to him. His life,
non-righteous behavior of Kauravas, and sufferings of Pandavas had no value in face
of his pledge. As to Dronacharya and Vidura, their dharma was to obey the king. To
oppose the king or to find faults with him (or his sons) would be against their dharma.
They have to be with the king’s decision whether he is right or wrong.
The dice game of the Sabha Parvan, this "playful" (yet deadly serious) conflict
between Pandava and Kaurava foreshadows the apocalyptic battle between the two
clans, and the outcome of the game provides the impetus for bringing about that
event. The dice game embodies a seemingly irresolvable conflict that is central not
only to the epic, but to the larger tradition of which it is a part: the conflict between
chaos and order, unpredictable and the certain. If it were a game of ritual and its
objective was to bring social order and harmony between brothers then it the game
would be planned at a sacred place which makes the environment as in a temple. The
Mahabharata's ritual dice game, however, results not in the establishment of social
order, but in their destruction largely because its participants fail to follow the proper
rules. One obvious flaw in the dice game as ritual is that it is wrongly emplaced.
In most versions of sacrifice this kind of game took place in a hut which contained a
throne on which the king was ceremonially installed after taking three "Vishnu steps,
intended to recreate Vishnu's miraculous reclamation of the three worlds. The hut
provided the "focusing lens" for sacrality, marking off the ritual space and the
miniature cosmos which it embodied from the outside. Pandavas' hall has such a
model as Krishna tells the Asura craftsman to "build an assembly hall where we will
see the designs of the Gods laid out and the plans of Asuras and men”. Thus logical
analog to this hut in the world of the epic is the assembly hall built for the Pandavas
by Maya and therefore the most likely location for the dice game. Yet the
Mahabharata's game occurs not in the Pandavas' hall, but in the hall of the Kauravas,
which, though very beautiful, is built specifically for the purpose of gambling and is
not sacralized by the status of a ritual microcosm.
9

The epic's dice game also diverges from the prescribed ritual in the fact of the king's
participation. In the rajasuya's dice game, players were members of four varnas; the
king apparently did not actually participate, aside from being presented with the dice
at the end of the game. Yudhistira himself tells us that gambling is "trickery, an evil"
inwhich "there is no kshatriya prowess." Clearly, Yudhistira, as the sacrificer in the
rajasuya ritual and as a king and kshatriya, should not be participating in the game.
If the king doesn't actually play, the king can not lose, and the prescribed social and
cosmic order will remain intact. Yudhisthira's participation shifts the dice game from
a mode of "generating the expected" to a mode of "generating the unexpected."
Rather than the establishment of the proper social order, his participation results in
its complete reversal. If ritual was properly performed, the world would remain
eternally the same.
Conclusion
From one point of view, Vyasa’s epic is a study of the use and abuse of power. It is
not that in itself power is good or bad. It is essentially a force, a weapon, which can
be used to save and foster or to harm and extort: “Desiring power first as an
instrument for the achievement of other ends, he falls in love with and retains it as an
end in itself.”
Urdhvabahurviraumyesa na ca kashcicchrnoti me |
Dharmadarthashca kamashca sa kimartham na sevyyata ||
“I raise my arms and I shout – but no one listens!
From dharma comes success and pleasure: Why is dharma not practised?”
– Svargarohana Parva
The entire Mahabharata is in fact intimately concerned with issues of play, of which
the dice game is just one example.
What the dice game in the Mahabharata presents us with, then, is the disintegration
of the boundaries between sacrifice and ritual. In the rajasuya ritual texts, a ritualized
10

game is designed to solve a problem created by the ritual, and its predetermined
outcome is executed neatly and safely. The Sabha Parvan's dice game, however,
catapults us into a world of spontaneity, danger, and violence, in which only
destruction is assured. This story does not explicate the issues raised by Draupadi,
but emphasizes the breach of duty by the elders who did not follow the dharma
codes.
The entire Mahabharata is the narration of a sage-poet of boundless wisdom who
was both a participant and a witness to the drama of life that was unfolded through
him and all around him – witness in the spiritual, in the Vedantic sense.
There is no shame in him when he speaks of his own birth. He narrates with complete
dispassion how Sage Parashara saw his mother, a dark, young girl engaged in ferrying
passengers across the Yamuna then, and lusted for her. He would speak with the
same detachment of how he himself could not retain self-control at the sight of the
Apsara Shuki and how his son Shuka was born to her. And then he will proceed to
speak without inhibitions of the lusts of the future generations of his family – of
sexual lusts, of power lusts, of vengeance lusts, of violence lusts.
The narrative technique employed, in a poem with a bewildering number of apparent
narrators, the so-called narratorial voice is largely concealed. There are few
explanations or even lyric elements by which an author might address his audience
directly, telling them how he expects them to respond to his tale. Here, author has
conveyed their meaning from the outside, presenting their story by means of a series
of tableaux, and leaving the audience to interpret the characters’ feelings from their
actions. The hero’s dilemmas are standardly conveyed, not by any internal
deliberations, but by the juxtaposition of opposing arguments. The hero has
remained resolute, but author have indicated the doubts and temptations he has
silently overcome by putting them into the mouths of the lesser characters, a
technique which serves to maintain the hero’s moral stature, or even to increase it.
The backbone of the mahabharata is its dialogues. These dialogues bring out the
various ideologies and view points to a particular situation. Nonetheless, it is not
necessary that they reach a conclusion. To any question of dharma, several answers
11

are given and no answer is adjudged supreme. Everyone answers according to his
dharma and the reader has to choose according to his own dharma. That is why, the
Mahabharata is considered to be a text of debates. The most important function of
the dialogues is that it provides a meditative moment to characters to explore various
moral options available to them for a given situation. Therefore, we can see how
complex is the style, structure and narrative technique of the Mahabharata is.
However its language is so free flowing and rhythmic that the philosophies that are
really hard to understand are made easy to read.
12